Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Netflix loses 1M users in Spain over password policing

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

571–580 of 966 posts

Re: Netflix loses 1M users in Spain over password policing

#571

Post by skeaker »

medellin wrote: post #557

Been using netflix for 12 years now. If they roll this out for me i will instantly stop using it. I pay for 4 screens not because i use it but because i set it up for my parents and wifes parents who just don’t understand how that all works. Additionally i have a house in two countries and if they make that a pain in the butt for me I’m done as well. I’m paying for convenience I already know how to pirate all of this…

Yep, they're forgetting that convenience is really all they offer to an individual customer. Pirating a show is still very easy, and if you want to support the creators of the show, buying their box set off of Amazon or whatever other storefront isn't too hard and cuts out the middleman. The only reason I tolerate their skimming from the people that actually create the content I watch is that it makes the process of both watching the content and supporting the creators of the content totally painless. As soon as pirate then buy boxes becomes easier again, that's what I suspect a lot of people will go back to.

Re: Netflix loses 1M users in Spain over password policing

#573

Post by the_gipsy »

In Spain piracy is technically illegal but so far the MPAA equivalent could not successfully sue common citizens for pirating. As far as I know at least, perhaps there have been some isolated cases. I have always been downloading pirated content, and still do for content that is not on one of my 3 streaming services, without worry, just the technical hassle.

Re: Netflix loses 1M users in Spain over password policing

#574

Post by sebzim4500 »

ModernMech wrote: post #492
acuozzo wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Can you offer a full throated defense of why you feel it's okay to pirate media in 2023 -- NOT OP -- In the general case, no, but consider the cases of: 1. "Altered media" e.g. (1) Star Wars, (2) THX 1138. 2. "Remixed media" e.g. (1) Terminator 2 not having its theatrical CDS mix, (2) Earthquake not having its SENSURROUND mix 3. "Omitted media" e.g. (1) Halloween not having its original mono soundtrack, (2) The Exo…

This is an argument for changing the law, not violating the law.

It's an argument for both

Re: Netflix loses 1M users in Spain over password policing

#575

Post by mitchdoogle »

baq wrote: post #115
pjc50 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an old movie kind of guy: I don't get why nobody wants me to have a big economical catalogue of all the movies. If you want to watch stuff from before about 1990 your best bet is pirating it off Youtube, oddly. Or hoping it's part of the 20th Century Fox that ended up on Disney+. The most generous film studio is .. Mosfilm. I suppose it's fitting that the Communist movies are available for free. (Criterion looks p…

That's the paradox: everybody wants to build and operate that since it's obvious everyone would subscribe to such a service, it'd be a cash cow, a golden goose, etc. But nobody wants to share their slice of the copyright and licensing pie with anybody else for revenue reasons, brand reasons, whatever, so we're slowly moving back toward the cable model with 200 subscriptions and nothing to watch. Torrents will be back…

The real question is why do people feel like they deserve to have access to absolutely everything? The home entertainment landscape has continually moved towards more options, better technology, and more access, and always at a cheaper rate per hour of programming than before. Of course, if you want to maintain access to absolutely everything, then your cost is always going to go up, because the pool of absolutely everything continues to get larger and larger, not just from new content, but from the inclusion of old content that wasn't available in any form before. There is a disconnect that comes from the fact that people can't/don't actually watch that much.

The only thing keeping cable alive today is live sports, but that eventually will be folded into existing streaming services or they will have their own services. Which brings me to my next point. There will very likely be 200 subscription services (if there aren't already), but the more there are, the more niche and specialized they will be. But importantly, you will be able to choose what you want (a la carte). This is a far cry from cable because cable has never been a la carte. They've always required you to purchase at least a basic package with 30-50 + channels, and each channel getting a couple bucks each month. The consumer's total cost is at least $50 / mo, probably more

Compare that to one of the typical big streamers which are $10 - $15 per month. Netflix, Max, Hulu, Disney - each of these alone has more content than you could ever watch. As long as they are all around to stay in competition, then prices will remain low. The absolute worst thing that could happen for consumers is for streamers to combine and form a conglomerate. Now that would be like cable - they'd have a monopoly and they'd end up charging you more overall than you were paying before, and then singling out "premium" content for even more money.

If you feel like you have to subscribe to all of them, that is simply a marker of their success in marketing to you. There is enough content (good content that you WILL enjoy) on any one of them. Or hell - even on Youtube which you can watch for free, there will be enough content to keep you from getting bored.

Re: Netflix loses 1M users in Spain over password policing

#576

Post by gigel82 »

ModernMech wrote: post #535
jjulius wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This, absolutely this, for my wife and I. Movies and shows that we love, we also download because it's often been inevitable that they get dropped from a streaming service at some point. Or, they're moved over to a new service (see: Peacock/Office) and we don't think that paying an additional monthly fee just to access that one show that we only occasionally watch is worth it. Similarly, if the streaming service cont…

> Similarly, if the streaming service continues to play ads despite paying for the service, we will just pirate the content. Why though? Why don't you just watch some other content? There's so much out there, and you have so many choices, available without any ads, and also if you choose you can consume free content as well. Given that you have these alternatives, why do you feel you have the right to nonetheless vio…

Good question; I can find gimmicks and talk about how I hate ads and whatnot, but really, it's because I don't assign the same value to an infinitely copy-able digital asset (which is confounding since I work in software).

I did a lot of pirating when I was a kid; I still do a little now (but a lot less), mostly out of frustration with the cost and availability of the content on streaming platforms. I wouldn't steal stuff from a store (because I know that causes actual material loss among other things), but making an additional copy of a TV show episode (which I wouldn't have bought anyway) - it's a philosophical question whether that causes a loss for someone.

Re: Netflix loses 1M users in Spain over password policing

#577

Post by sebzim4500 »

geodel wrote: post #339
ModernMech wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I genuinely don't understand this sentiment in 2023. Maybe in 2003 it was reasonable, but if you have the money, just spend it to buy the content you want. I get that there's a lot of "crap" that you don't want to see, but I appreciate some of that, and I'm sure you appreciate some of what I call "crap". I don't see how you go from that situation to justifying not paying for it. There's a price for the content and it…

Simplest answer is because one can . It is much safer to grab any digital content than physical goods. If it were easier like this to grab food from stores and restaurants, grab homes of other people, they would do that too. Its not even hypothetical, in many parts of the world this all happens very commonly.

For what it's worth, I am willing to pirate shows/software but would never steal physical goods even if there was a gurantee that I would get away with it.

Re: Netflix loses 1M users in Spain over password policing

#578

Post by tough »

the_gipsy wrote: post #573

In Spain piracy is technically illegal but so far the MPAA equivalent could not successfully sue common citizens for pirating. As far as I know at least, perhaps there have been some isolated cases. I have always been downloading pirated content, and still do for content that is not on one of my 3 streaming services, without worry, just the technical hassle.

I once won a lawsuit against the MPAA in Spain. AMA lol

FWIW YMMV and laws change so I wouldn't advise anyone running such a service from spain doxxed. But using it? It's not germany where predatory lawyers will try to sue you out of torrenting ubuntu or whatever

Re: Netflix loses 1M users in Spain over password policing

#579

Post by hydrok9 »

npteljes wrote: post #175
hurril wrote: post #90

I can understand the outrage over content, wokeness, the direction, etc. But being angry over having to pay for services rendered? Come on. Don't use Netflix (or the alternatives) as a comfy Piratebay. Get it together, we're not children.

I feel the same. Netflix (and other streaming sites) provide insane value for a measly subscription price. In comparison, I think books, DVDs, CDs are way overpriced. Youtube Premium is the other thing. They make their own advertisements go away for $5/mo in Hungary, which is half of a cheap meal at a restaurant, and people act like it's pulling teeth.

Its funny you say this because here in Canada, the reaction I get from saying I pay $10 for Youtube Plus is the same.

Re: Netflix loses 1M users in Spain over password policing

#580

Post by nonethewiser »

dcow wrote: post #458

What I truly don’t understand is why everyone decided they needed their own streaming platforms. What’s the strategy there? Why does Disney need to invest resources into Disney+ when they can just sell the rights to their content to one or two Streaming platforms and make more money? Did they think it would be cheaper to build their own platforms? Same for all the others. Who cares if Netflix owns the streaming user-…

> Why does Disney need to invest resources into Disney+ when they can just sell the rights to their content to one or two Streaming platforms and make more money?

Is this true? Presumably their intention is to make more money by doing it themselves.

Post reply on HN